ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
34
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
MiFID - Investor Protection X MiFID - Secondary Markets X Sustainable finance X Careers X Transparency X Fund Management X Board of Appeal X Warnings and publications for investors X CESR Archive X Technical Advice X Decision X
Reset all filters
Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
09/06/2010 10-333 Technical Advice- The Equivalence between the Japanese Regulatory and Supervisory Framework and the EU Regulatory Regime for Credit Rating Agencies , Technical Advice PDF
4.59 MB
16/11/2011 2011/379 Final report- ESMA's technical advice to the European Commission on possible implementing measures of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive Technical Advice PDF
3.51 MB
28/11/2014 2014/1417 ESMA's technical advice to the European Commission on delegated acts required by the UCITS V Directive Technical Advice PDF
469.49 KB
19/12/2014 2014/1569 Technical Advice to the Commission on MiFID II and MiFIR , Technical Advice PDF
2.8 MB
Reasons for publication The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) received a formal request (mandate) from the European Commission (Commission) on 23 April 2014 to provide technical advice to assist the Commission on the possible content of the delegated acts required by several provisions of Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR). The mandate focuses on technical issues which follow from MiFID II and MiFIR and is available on the European Commission website (here). ESMA was required to provide technical advice by no later than six months after the entry into force of MiFID II and MiFIR (2 July 2014). Contents This final report follows the same structure as the Consultation Paper  (CP) published by ESMA on 22 May 2014 which is: (1) Introduction, (2) Investor protection, (3) Transparency, (4) Data publication, (5) Micro-structural issues, (6) Requirements applying on and to trading venues, (7) Commodity derivatives and (8) Portfolio compression. This paper also contains summaries of responses to the CP received by ESMA. The rationale of those items covered already in the CP for which no relevant changes have been introduced, is not developed again in this Final Report. ESMA recommends, therefore, to read this report together with the CP published on 22 May 2014 to have a complete vision of the rationale for ESMA’s technical advice. Next steps Delegated acts should be adopted by the Commission so that they enter into application by 30 months following the entry into force of the Directive and Regulation, taking into account the right of the European Parliament and Council to object to a delegated act within 3 months (which can be extended by a further 3 months).
27/03/2014 2014/312 Technical advice to the European Commission on the information that competent authorities should provide to ESMA pursuant to Article 67(3) of the AIFMD Technical Advice PDF
330.79 KB
Reasons for publication ESMA is issuing this technical advice in response to the mandate received from the European Commission on 20 December 2013 for advice on the possible content of the delegated act required by Article 67(5) of the AIFMD, concerning the information that EU competent authorities have to provide quarterly to ESMA pursuant to Article 67(3) of the Directive. This information is needed in order to allow ESMA to produce the opinion and the advice required in Article 67(1) of the AIFMD, in relation to the possible extension of the AIFMD passport to non-EU AIFs and non-EU AIFMs. Contents Section II describes the background of the proposal. Section III specifies the timing for the provision of the information to ESMA and lists the information that the competent authorities should provide quarterly to ESMA. The list of information is divided into three parts: the first refers to the information about the functioning of the passport for EU AIFMs; the second deals with the functioning of the national private placement regime for non-EU AIFs and non-EU AIFMs; and the third refers to the issues arising from the functioning of both systems. Finally, Section IV reproduces the mandate for advice issued by the European Commission. Next steps ESMA will cooperate closely with the European Commission in order to facilitate an expeditious adoption of the delegated act required by Article 67(5) of the AIFMD.
02/12/2014 2014/BOA/05 Decision by the ESA BoA concerning Investor Protection Europe sprl , Decision PDF
229.85 KB
The Joint Board of Appeal of the ESAs decides on the inadmissibility of an appeal brought by IPE sprl, a company based in Brussels, against a decision by ESMAThe Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities published today its decision in an appeal brought by Investor Protection Europe (IPE) sprl, a company based in Brussels, against a decision of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) of 10 June 2014 not to initiate an investigation under Article 17 of the ESMA Regulation regarding an alleged breach of Union law by the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier of Luxembourg.  The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal was inadmissible, and in the light of that decision, did not consider the substance of IPE’s complaint.
17/07/2014 2014/C1/02 Board of Appeal Decision , Decision PDF
368.94 KB
The Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority) published its decision in an appeal brought by SV Capital OÜ, an Estonian company, against a decision of the EBA. This was the second appeal to be considered by the Board of Appeal in this matter between the same parties concerning the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank raised a question of Union law. Following the Board of Appeal’s affirmative decision of 24 June 2013, the appellant requested the EBA to initiate an investigation against the Estonian and Finnish Financial Supervision Authorities because their alleged failure to take action in respect of individuals in the Estonian branch of Nordea Bank Finland PLC whom it was alleged were not fit and proper persons to be key function holders in the bank. The EBA decided that it would not initiate an investigation.  The Board of Appeal decided that the EBA had been right to raise the matter with the national supervisors, but that having done so, it was entitled to take no further action in the light of their responses. The Board accordingly dismissed the appellant’s appeal against the EBA’s decision.
30/07/2015 2015/1236 ESMA's advice to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the application of the AIFMD passport to non-EU AIFMs and AIFs Technical Advice PDF
1.36 MB
Executive summary Reasons for publication In accordance with Articles 36 and 42 of the Directive 2011/61/EU on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMD), non-EU alternative investment fund managers (AIFMs) and non-EU alternative investment funds (AIFs) managed by EU AIFMs are subject to the national private placement regime (NPPR) of each of the Member States where the AIFs are marketed or managed. However, the AIFMD makes provision for the passport, which is currently reserved to EU AIFMs and AIFs, to be potentially extended in future. Article 67(1) of the AIFMD establishes that, by 22 July 2015, ESMA shall issue to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission advice on the application of the passport to non-EU AIFMs and AIFs in accordance with the rules set out in Article 35 and 37 to 41 of the AIFMD. This document sets out ESMA’s advice on the application of the passport to six non-EU countries: Guernsey, Hong Kong, Jersey, Switzerland, Singapore and the United States. Contents Section 1 of the advice sets out the background to ESMA’s work, while the detailed assessment of each of the aforementioned non-EU countries is contained in section 2. Annexes 1 to 7 contain a summary of the feedback to the call for evidence that ESMA launched in November 2014. Annex 8 gives a detailed breakdown by non-EU country of the number of non-EU AIFs and non-EU AIFMs active in Member States in accordance with Articles 36 and 42 of the AIFMD. Next Steps ESMA will continue to work on its assessment of other non-EU countries not covered in this advice with a view to delivering further submissions to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission in the coming months. For those non-EU jurisdictions with which there are currently no supervisory cooperation arrangements in place for the purposes of the AIFMD, ESMA will continue its efforts to agree a MoU with the authorities concerned.
16/02/2015 2015/227 Final Report- ESMA’s technical advice to the European Commission on the delegated acts of the Regulations on European Social Entrepreneurship Funds and European Venture Capital Funds Technical Advice PDF
609.09 KB
12/09/2016 2016/1140 Final advice on AIFMD passport Technical Advice PDF
621.95 KB

This version of the advice includes the following clarifications with respect to the assessment of the Isle of Man:

  • the Isle of Man underwent an assessment by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2003 and 2009 as part of the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP); and
  • the self-assessment carried out by the Isle of Man Financial Services Authority in 2013 was an assisted self-assessment.
24/06/2013 BoA 2013-008 Board of Appeal Decision , Decision PDF
242.72 KB
The joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, ESMA and EIOPA) has published today its decision in an appeal brought by an Estonian company against a decision of the EBA. It concerned the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank may be a matter within EU law, and not just national law. Allowing the appeal, the Board of Appeal interpreted Directive No. 2006/48/EC consistently with the EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. It came to the conclusion that the “fit and proper” requirement is not restricted to the persons who direct the business of the credit institution. The matter therefore was within the EBA’s powers of investigation. Although the appellant criticised the way in which the EBA dealt with its complaint, the Board of Appeal made it clear that it did not accept that criticism. It considered that the EBA dealt with the complaint in an appropriate manner. The ground on which the appeal was allowed was one of interpretation of the applicable legal provisions. The case was remitted to the EBA to adopt the appropriate decision in accordance with the Board of Appeal’s findings. This is for information only. The decision consists of the signed Decision only. For any enquiries, please contact EIOPA’s Press Office: Anzhelika Mayer Tel.: +49 69 9511 1968
13/01/2014 BoA 2013-014 Board of Appeal Decision Global Private Rating Company v. ESMA , Decision PDF
361.96 KB
Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities dismisses appeal made by a refused CRA-applicant against ESMA On 10 January 2014, the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities handed down its decision on an appeal by the appellant, Global Private Rating Company “Standard Rating” Ltd, against the refusal by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to register it as a credit rating agency. This is the first appeal against a decision by ESMA refusing an applicant registration as a credit rating agency. The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal should be dismissed, and that ESMA’s refusal decision should be confirmed. It stated that it accepted the appellant’s point that the registration of a credit rating agency by ESMA is a new process, and recognised that the procedures will to an extent take time fully to work out. Nevertheless, because of the responsibilities placed on credit rating agencies and their importance in the financial system generally, it considered that the onus must be on an applicant to satisfy ESMA that the relevant requirements are met. The application and its contents must be very clear, and it is not ESMA’s responsibility as regulator to remedy deficiencies.
26/01/2016 BOA 2016 001 BoA 2016- 001 (Decision Kluge v EBA) Decision PDF
196.32 KB
20/07/2017 BoA 2017 01 FinancialCraft Analytics Sp. z o.o. vs ESMA BoA Decision , Decision PDF
693 KB
30/04/2018 BoA 2018-01 Decision in an appeal by A v ESMA , Decision PDF
392.62 KB
26/09/2018 BoA D 2018 02 Decision in an Appeal by B. against a decision of the European Securities and Markets Authority Decision PDF
382.53 KB
27/02/2019 BoA D 2019 01, 02, 03 and 04 Appeal by Svenska Handelsbanken AB, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB, Swedbank A and Nordea Bank Abp against the European Securities and Markets Authority Decision PDF
829.04 KB
12/10/2020 BoA D 2020 01 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howerton vs ESMA Decision PDF
616.54 KB
04/11/2020 BoA D 2020 02 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howerton vs EIOPA Decision PDF
85.83 KB
08/10/2019 boa-2019-d-05_decision BOA decision creditreform_rating_ag_vs_eba Decision PDF
922.78 KB